This morning I saw a quote that stated 80% of what is learned in training is forgotten. I have no idea what that figure was founded on. Regardless, it trigged a thought in mind that made me wonder what the most important lessons that I have learned in education, training and practice are. In no particular order, here are some accompanied by a short rationale. The rationale reflects the journey in my development and I would love to hear your thoughts on what I have written.

Reflection: A lot is said (and not practiced) of reflection but, for me, it drives everything that I do. It is the glue that links in- and on-action practice related behaviours together. I learned that, when questioning why I organised and managed activities in the way I did, I was able to make them better; not so that they ‘looked’ better, but they enabled learning to occur more inclusively and progressively. Being able to do this in-, on- and retrospectively-on-action was transformatory. It seems such a simple concept but I strongly believe that this is what is at the heart of practice for all effective teachers, coaches and instructors.

You don’t just get ‘naughty’ kids: When I first started my degree in 2010, I wrongly thought some children, young people and adolescents were born naughty rule breakers and disruptors that behaved in that way because they could. Later, I realised that the behaviours exhibited by all children is founded on stimuli that has affected all children at a particular moment in time. That moment in time could be at any point. Equally, I think it is important for effective teaching, coaching and instructing that children, participants and instructees challenge us in this way – that is their natural desire to make sense of the world around them. We need to help them in that sense making process. In other words, challenging stereotypes and attitudes.

Holistic practice: I think a lot of people use holistic practice as a ‘catch-all’ and ‘go to’ phrase when discussing teaching and learning but it is a real thing and not everyone has holistic practice at the heart of what they do. That doesn’t make them an ineffective teacher, coach or instructor. Rather, it has contextualised their practice. Take sport, particularly the talent development/elite domains: should every coach prioritise producing a well-rounded individual over an elite performer that wins? For me, holistic practice is contextual. Educators have a legal responsibility and duty of care to ensure that the holistic development of children is at the heart of what they do whereas sport coaches or instructors may not. It doesn’t make them ineffective as I said. Rather, it made me aware of what developing the whole child, participant or instructee is and whether it does actually (need to) feature across contexts. In other words, practice is and should be contextualised.

Needs-led practice: Teachers, coaches and instructors need to have breadth and depth of teaching, coaching and instructing as well as of the ‘subject matter’ that they are delivering. When this has been achieved, they can then assess the individual(s) in their charge, generate data on their current attainment or performance and then begin a process of needs-led teaching, coaching or instructing in order to progress their charges. Therefore, learning what the needs of children, participants and instructees are is a vital responsibility when teaching, coaching or instructing. Regular assessment therefore is a vital feature of reflective practice that informs learning and progression as practice can be continually informed and enhanced to meet the evolving needs of children, participants and instructees.

No one cares how much you know until they know how much you care: Lets get straight to the point. In my opinion, effective practitioners get straight to the point. They don’t waste time, they are accurate and they are concise. Pupils, participants or instructees are not interested in a teacher’s, coach’s or instructors self-perceived level of knowledge or how much that person likes to listen to themselves. Ultimately, they are concerned with how their teacher, coach or instructor can help them progress and also in my opinion, real progress is not made by those pupils, participants or instructees until they realise that their teacher, coach or instructor cares about their progression. This is vitally important to my final point, below.

Relationships: Everything that we do as teachers, coaches or instructors should be focused with building positive relationships. When this has been achieved, the above (i.e. real progress), will truly occur. Everybody remembers their most favourite and least favourite teachers for very different reasons. But what of those teachers that aren’t so easily remembered? You probably have thought of one now, but the reason that prevents that group of not so easily identifiable teachers being remembered immediately is that they didn’t establish a positive relationship that truly connected with you. Your most favourite teachers did, your least favourite didn’t. This is the same with coaches and instructors, too. But for a teacher, coach or instructor to establish a positive relationship with every pupil, participant or instructee in the way that your favourite teacher did with you is incredibly complex. But what is important is that all teachers, coaches and instructors attempt to do so. At the very least, it is important that a teacher, a coach or an instructor from a school, a club or an organisation does so with every child as every child matters. This is because not every child, player or instructee wants to achieve the same things and arguably not all teachers, coaches or instructors should try to make every child, participant or instructee want the same thing. For that reason, the incredibly complex endeavour to build positive relationships exemplified. Therefore, children, participants and instructees will gravitate towards their favourite teachers, coaches and instructors because they have identified that those individuals will help them achieve what it is that makes them unique.

And there you have it. A very concise and by no means exhaustive list of some of the lessons that have really helped me progress as a coach and lecturer and they will serve me well when I begin my Initial Teacher Education. What I hope that it also portrays to those who are more junior and senior than me is how theory does actually influence practice. In time, I look forward to adding to this list and identifying if, and how, this list evolves over time. Perhaps that can start now: what is it that you have learned that has really enhanced your practice and why? How can my key lessons above be informed and developed by you?

I have recently delivered a series of lead lectures for a cross semester module called 'Foundations of Coaching and Instructing. The facility that was used to host these lectures was a University drama theatre; almost the traditional lecture room with raised seating for the audience and an area at the front to deliver that housed a lectern which looked after the computer, audio equipment and microphone.As someone who is passionate about teaching and learning, I can remember those horrendous lectures/talks/presentations I have been to where an individual would stand at the front, completely still (usually behind a lectern) and would read written notes to the audience. If this approach to teaching was juxtapositioned with unclear visual aids then it would be completely disengaging! However, I have also been lucky enough to be taught by some excellent teachers (who I am now lucky enough to call my colleagues) who delivered lead lectures in a variety of ways. The commonality amongst them, though, was how they used the space in the lecture theatre to keep the audience engaged and more importantly, learning. In fact, they were so good at using space that the visual aids they used became secondary. In other words, their delivery was not just teaching, but a performance in itself.So, when I started to plan this series of lectures I sifted the wheat from the chaff and began to copy the good practice that I saw and I have to say it worked pretty well. I also used the passage ways to walk up, down, and across the seated area. This proved to be a good approach because it acted as a stimulus to the students in the 'hard to engage' parts of the theatre - put differently, those sat at the back! This also sends another message. It tells the students that the member of staff is completely confident to walk up, down, and across the seated area (where the passages are clear, of course), and that the students should not get 'comfortable'.This links neatly with learning and the application of the Padlet software. Now, I used the approach described above to try and create a climate where the students had to be alert. I also spent a good deal of time trying to learn as many names as possible. This enabled me on my journeys through the seated areas to fire questions to the students to keep them on task and thinking about the content rather than on other things. There was a real mixture of responses from the students, though. For instance, some would provide well substantiated answers based on the content that was covered whereas some other students would simply say "I don't know". Which is fine, because I recognise people learn at different rates but I was also savvy enough to be aware of 'impression management' and whether they were saying "I don't know" because they "couldn't be bothered" to provide a response. (This is an interesting situation for a £9,000 fee-paying student to put themselves in, I find).I discussed this with colleagues at work and two suggested I try Padlet. Now, this isn't an endorsement of Padlet by any means. Rather, it is a blog detailing how and why I used Padlet. In other words, I wasn't happy with the responses I was getting from the students and I wondered why they didn't engage with the questioning as I thought they would. I also had to take into consideration that I had a handful of students who provided well substantiated answers all the time and I was aware that those views might not necessarily reflect the views of the 150+ students in the room. So, for those of you who haven't heard of Padlet, take a look at this link to their site. I used Padlet in two different ways. First, I recruited two third year students to play table tennis in the lecture theatre. The lecture content was on skill acquisition and I discussed "Bandwidth Feedback" (as well as other forms) to highlight the correlation between the role of the coach and skill acquisition. I proceeded to model a poor coaching session and coached the two third year students in different coaching styles. What I asked the audience to do was to comment on the padlet and "say what they saw". Have a look for yourself:

You'll notice that the "Role of the Coach" box in the top left hand corner of the Padlet explains what I asked the students to do. You'll also see that there is a wide variety of answers, some who believed what they saw was good practice, others saw poor practice, and some remained indifferent. However, the point is that those wide variety of views were able to be discussed by me after the mini coaching session because we had time to do so. For instance, what may seem to some to be a tedious Q&A (that also has to avoid picking on the same people and avoids listening to the responses of the same few) takes a lot of time, coupled with the fact that a lot didn't want to feedback anyway. I then started to wonder whether this was a confidence issue that the students had and as a consequence, the students didn't want to feedback in front of others. This I thought was likely and also fuelled my desire to find another more inclusive and effective way of taking the students opinions into consideration. Anyway, this approach proved successful. I had a lot more content to discuss that was based on the students opinions and hopefully contextualised their understanding of what they saw in more detail for them. For my next lecture I used Padlet to provide more structure. From the image below you'll see four of five tasks which were linked to my visual aids:﻿

From the image above you can see that the responses are more systematic and easier to read in comparison to the first. This approach also worked very well. Instead of using Q&A, I still used space as effectively as I could like I described above. But, where this use of padlet differs from the first is that I primed the students before the lecture to keep looking at the visual aids carefully to identify where, and what, the tasks were. This enabled the students to populate the Padlet (as you see above) whilst I was still discussing the lecture content. In other words (and this is the really neat part of Padlet), is that the students can anonymously provide an answer whilst seeing what the other students have also written. From a teaching perspective you can ascertain a lot of info like, how many are on task? Are the students providing a correct answer (if there is one)? What content have you discussed that has really resonated with them? I am sure there are much more but this list is basically providing you with insight to what I was thinking when I used Padlet.There are some issues with Padlet, though. For instance, it isn't the most user-friendly. You can select a range of privacy options to safeguard the content of what you are discussing and then, upon selection, you are given a weblink. This then needs to be emailed to your students. You also need to consider how many projectors you have in your lecture space. I was lucky in that I had three projectors and three screens. So, when I used Padlet, I kept the largest screen (which was the centre screen) to project my visual aids only. I then asked our IT technicians to get a split VGA cable which was attached to a different laptop, to project the Padlet onto the two screens that flanked the centre screen. As you can see, using Padlet in the manner that I have can provide a number of benefits that are free of charge to practitioners. But as the saying goes "there is no such thing as a free lunch". So, the price you pay is through the currency of time and, if you have enough time, you can set up Padlet to provide a different experience for your students (or clients) in a completely different way, that in a time of wireless wifi devices, seems to engage students. You also need to consider that it 'doesn't fit to a screen size'. In other words, you need to scroll left & right (like you see above) if you have more tasks that don't all fit on the screen. This is also an issue that needs to be considered if you have a very large group of students like I had. Padlet does have a fee-paying option which may negotiate this issue but I am yet to use that option and am therefore unable to comment. Overall, including Padlet into two of my lectures was certainly a welcome addition and I would also argue that I would not want to use Padlet in all of them. The reason being is that I (we) have to consider the following: "does electronic communication (such as Padlet) prevent students from developing softer skills such as articulation, clarity of thought and speech, eloquence etc. that seem to be forgotten in contemporary society?". Certainly the sports-based degree programmes that I deliver on need to develop these soft skills in order for the students to one day become effective practitioners themselves. The development of these soft skills can be fostered in lead lectures, but where the line is drawn between the use of technology and traditional Q&A approaches needs to be considered. I would be really interested to hear your views on this.

I have just returned from what is always a fantastic ESCA Kings College Cricket Festival. Ten county U12 boy’s teams from England (both First Class and Minor Counties), Wales U 12s and an U12 St Stithian School XI from South Africa made two groups of six teams who played each other in a competitive tournament. It was superbly organised, managed and administered by the officials in charge!However, as Head Coach of Cornwall U12s (a minor county) I am very confident in saying that as always, I have come away learning just as much as a coach, as the players in my team have (I hope!). It is these insights that I wanted to share and hopefully, receive some from others as well. The teams in our group were Yorkshire, Essex, Worcestershire, Somerset and Wales – that’s four first class counties and the Welsh team. Yorkshire, at present, have provided nearly half of the full England team and are Division One champions however it is worthy to state that all of the remaining teams in this group – with the exception of Cornwall – have a consistent record of producing England cricketers. But, why is that? Initially, you cannot ignore the demographic. The human population of Yorkshire (5.3mil), Essex (1.3), Worcestershire (569,000), Somerset (530,000), Wales (3.0mil) and Cornwall (523,300) is interesting to note. When compared to our fixtures against Somerset (lost by 20 runs), Worcestershire (lost by 3 wickets) the demographic may hypothetically suggest that a similar human population may correlate to a more competitive fixture. When compared to our fixture against Yorkshire, we lost by 9 wickets, therefore underpinning the aforementioned hypothesis. We didn’t play, unfortunately, against Wales due to the weather so this crude hypothesis needs more testing, but there is some merit. However, any reader of Matthew Syed, Malcolm Gladwell, David Epstien, Daniel Coyle (and others!) will know that this isn’t everything – the theories of outliers, talent hotbeds, purposeful practice and the talent code! This would suggest that human population isn’t necessarily an indicator of success, or in this case, producing and supporting young talent so as to nurture them (notice I didn’t put it, there) to help them become the best they are capable of being (some John Wooden there, too). If Gladwell’s David and Goliath is anything to go by, the Cornwall captain’s tactical awareness against Somerset very nearly created a superb victory. Equally, the same can be said against Worcestershire. In this situation, it’s not what you have, but rather, making best use of what you have. Yet, the boys (at times) have put other players from the first class counties on pedestals and play cricket in awe of them. I reminded them that they may play for a first class county at this age, but that may be by virtue of the school they go to, or the place that they live. In other words, they have not been born with an innate ability (I would argue anyway) that makes them a first class player at age 11 or 12. However my curiosity grew, what scaffolding do these boys need to help them compete? Now at U12 I am not concerned with results whatsoever! The players need to learn how to play the game and competition structures the format which provides stimuli for the players to learn from experientially and this is important. This view I share with our team manager who is also a very effective coach. We discussed our player’s development at this moment in time to those of the players our team played against and discussed it chronologically suggesting that they are approximately a year behind. This isn’t necessarily tangible though and I am not so sure how it can be measured but it is a mutual conclusion we both agreed with. And so, based on the argument in the previous paragraph, what is it that the players from the first class counties are getting to support them in their development that keeps them that step ahead? Why is it that first class counties consistently produce international cricketers in comparison to the minor counties? You could throw suggestions on facilities, quality of coaching, the demographic (and therefore a larger talent pool), funding, a higher standard of club open age and youth cricket, or better support networks (family, friends and club) (not exhaustive). The progression of minor counties players into first class county 2nd XI’s, academies and MCCU’s cannot be ignored either. However, from discussions with other coaches, it isn’t necessarily to do with the quality or quantity of the county coaching programmes (in one instance, I coach my team for longer than a first class county). Nor did the quality of facilities appear to have a major bearing on the first class players ability at this stage (Epstien and Coyle would agree on this). The standard of open age and youth cricket may be a contributor with tougher fixtures producing greater challenges for the players to overcome. What can be concluded is that this is complex – the academic literature would agree here too. For me, based on my experiences (and knowledge) of coaching is that talent development and supporting players to be the best they are capable of being is all about timing. Initially, the players must have an excellent support network from their family, friends, club and county that provides an excellent scaffold at every stage of their progress over time. Second, no matter what their team results or personal performances, a step up (or challenge) is never closed off from the player – those opportunities are always open and available; an inclusive, progressive system. The player’s individually learn how to harness fundamental emotions such as determination, drive, passion and a competitiveness longitudinally (not exhaustive). Finally, and physiologically, the players must develop the key physiologically attributes that are going to support their role in a team. What is absolute, though, is that this support network underpinned by innate characteristics and physiological development dovetail at the right time and are available to everyone, regardless of where they live and regardless of who they play for. As coaches, our job is to ensure that all of our players in all of our counties have access to such support and that all coaches have knowledge of the various stages of development.

For those who are familiar with the coach education landscape in the UK will know that it has been researched and developed considerably and this is testament to the very good work of everybody associated with sport in this nation. Sports Coach UK, The UK Coaching Framework, The Olympic Games, Sport England, UK Sport, the YST, Universities and NGBs provide fantastic development, education and leadership opportunities for anybody who is interested in putting absolutely anything into sport. That is something that everybody in sport should be proud of. Moving forwards, this work needs to continue to such an extent where the number of people involved in sport grows and grows. Coach education is seen as a vehicle to drive the standards of coaching practice up. Typically, a level 1 qualification would be the first rung on the coaching 'ladder' with you reaching the top of the ladder at level 4. There are some variations to this process and I do not intend to unpick these, but rather, discuss the issues that affect individuals as they climb this ladder. These issues could include physical, knowledge, skill, social, pedagogical, financial or experiential incompetencies (not exhaustive) that exclude the individual from meeting the demands of the programme assessment. Experience, though, is one I wish to pay particular attention to. Normally, when talking to a coach and you ask why they coach, they may say that it is because they had a fantastic experience of the game or they played to a high standard and want to put something back into the game, alternatively, it could be because they had a great coach who influenced them to become a coach themselves. Whatever their reason, experience of what it is you want to coach is normally vital in order to coach others to perform. But at what stage does limited (or, say, professional) experience become overbearing for effective coaching to take place? Put simply, limited experience may stop the coach from being able to contextualise the range of technical, tactical, psychological or social aspects of the game for the performers. On the other hand, professional experience may prevent the coach from understanding how an individual can make mistakes. But should these two dichotomous groups be separated? Is there not scope for trainee coaches to traverse boundaries? In other words, could an experientially limited individual - over time - develop the knowledge and skills in order to coach in an elite domain? Equally, could a professional coach not develop the pedagogical knowledge and skills over time in order to coach in a domain that is for novices? Therefore, should it not be the purpose of coach education to develop effective coaches and provide them with the knowledge and understanding of key coaching knowledge and skills in order to meet the needs of the individuals they coach at various stages of development? This perspective would align with research that argues excellent coaches are separated from average coaches as they can apply knowledge and skills better than those who just harbour that knowledge (Smith and Cushion, 2006). The more I think and analyse coach education the more I believe that it needs to be opened up to enable progression for individuals rather than pigeon hole them based on pre-determined conceptualisation of their coaching 'ability'. This includes ex-professionals and non-professionals. Coach education should enable them to become effective coaches, not reproducers of a course syllabus. If you are interested...Smith, M. and Cushion, C. "An investigation of the in-game behaviours of professional, top-level youth soccer coaches" Journal of Sports Sciences (24) 4:355-366.

Today whilst at work I was very fortunate to attend a talk delivered by Professor Adrian Taylor, of the University of Plymouth, discussing his (and colleagues) research which investigates physical activity interventions to combat depression. Worryingly, Professor Taylor detailed that a high percentage of children and young people under the age of 14 have some form of depression! As far as I am concerned, that has GOT to change. The talk was well attended with a diverse array of colleagues, students and external individuals attending and, like me, I am sure they were processing the information they were receiving specifically to their area of expertise. Now, for me, that is Physical Education and sports coaching. The thoughts, and there were many, that I immediately started to consider revolved around the following: How can physical education support physical activity? How can sports coaches (and other agents/agencies) support physical activity (as part of, and removed from) physical education? Do students actually understand that the 'matches', 'games', 'drills' (I don't like that word!), 'activities' and other terms interchangeably used, are actually just as much about getting them active as it is to learn the physical, social, cognitive, technical, tactical and lifestyle elements of those activities? What role do physical education teachers have with regards to challenging and changing the attitudes of children and young people so that they become physically active for life? Simply, do teachers have the time, resource(s) and support to impact on the lifelong learning and motivation of their pupils so that they stay physically active for life? These questions, and many more of them, are highly relevant for exploration to provide an empirical understanding so that it can be shared with teachers and coaches globally. Health, in a time where people are living longer than ever and are therefore becoming exposed to new diseases and illnesses, is an area that cannot be ignored. I believe, and I hope many others do too, that physical education can contribute influentially. The funding being acquired by the research teams who Professor Taylor work with are, in some cases, over £1 million - a huge figure! What disappointed me, though, was physical education was not mentioned at all during the talk other than Professor Taylor mentioning he primarily trained as a teacher in that subject before his career moved on. However, Professor Taylor may have chosen not to discuss physical education (and sport), like he mentioned with nutrition, for a whole range of issues. That said, I would be as bold as to state that physical education needs to be considered with regards to how it can contribute more robustly to preparing children and young people to tackle life's challenges and equip those individuals to counter them head on. Journal Articles that I have read that are written by David Kirk, Ashley Casey, Leen Haerens to name but a few, have argued the case for sport and health-based pedagogical models for physical education that are philosophically grounded. Physical education, though, continues to find itself in this contested space between competing ideas, discourses, ideologies and philosophical perspectives. But, after reading some thought provoking work by Susan Capel and Margaret Whitehead in Debates in Physical Education; they argue that physical education is concerned with learning in, through and about movement. According to Professor Taylor, physical activity can be as simple as enabling individuals to find pleasure during moderate exercise so that they continue to participate in future. To this end, if our pupils are learning in, through and about movement they must be physically active - is this always enjoyable, though? Physical education continues to be uniquely well placed to support individuals in learning about physical activity, health and movement and I am now thinking (maybe contentiously), is physical education actually getting the support it needs to continue this endeavour? I have no doubt that teachers will do their upmost to respect and support individual learners needs, make lesson safe and fun and inspire individuals to continue to participate in physical activity and sport for life. But is education policy and governance restricting physical education, its staff and ultimately its learners from having the impact we all know it can deliver?These all are worthy points and are only a collection of what my reflections were on this talk today. Some of these questions I cannot answer, some, I hope, may have already been answered and if not, I hope I can join other like minded individuals who share the same passion for physical education in making a lasting impact on the learning of children, young people and adolescents. I'd love nothing more than to hear your points of view on the issues raised here so please, comment away.

I recently read what I would call one of the best sports books I have ever read, Beyond a Boundary written by C.L.R. James. I first noticed the book through reading a sociology of sport textbook and it was, at a similar time, introduced to me by a colleague. It was a fascinating cultural examination of West Indian 'self-governance' at a time where the collection of islands were under colonial rule and cricket, but more importantly, the messages the game could send, traversed the boundaries. But, the book had a greater purpose, to answer the following: what do they know of cricket, who only cricket know? A question I, and a great many others, are still grappling to understand. What does it mean to you? The only way you will know is to read the book, and if you haven't read it, you must. It encapsulates some of the extraordinary power of the game of cricket, but more holistically, sport. Meanwhile, I have been reading literature that, collectively, is called Physical Cultural Studies (PCS). To get you started, have a look at the journal reference below, another fascinating read. The PCS research, among with other very important purposes, discusses 'embodiment'. But what is it? Well, as a cricket coach, I am constantly reading about cricket, watching cricket, coaching cricket, playing cricket and reflecting on all four. For all cricket fans, you will all know how incredible the World Cup was (particularly, and as much as it pains me to say this as a pom, the Aussies). And, it was actually before the World Cup started that I began to understand what 'embodiment' meant fully. In two words, it was Andre Russell. The West Indian allrounder that Clive Lloyd said could be one of the best in the world. And if you are unfamiliar with who Clive Lloyd is, follow the link on his name and see his credentials for yourself. Andre (and Clive) as West Indians provide a link to C.L.R. James (who was also a West Indian cricketer - just minus the international honours), but, actually, it is the idea of the 'physical' embodying and representing cultural meaning that provides the strongest link with James and PCS. If you follow the link on Andre's name you can see his statistics for yourself. Whilst they only tell you so much, they actually tell you a whole lot more. In my opinion (as humble as it may be), I strongly believe that Andre Russell is the embodiment of West Indian cricket in this moment in time. Inspirational, game-changing, talented, strong, symbolic. But why doesn't he (and West Indian cricket) perform to his (their) potential consistently? If you read Andre's statistics, they are modest in comparison of his contemporaries but it is he, Andre, who has West Indian flare that you cannot find anywhere else in the world; not even Australia. There are political influences on his (their) performances (namely the constant Digicel fall outs) and economic influences on his (their) performances (the lure of the franchised IPL). These combined provide a social reflection of the status quo of West Indian cricket. As a cricket coach, I am also aware that psychological, physiological, technical, tactical, and social (personal) reasons may influence his performances. However it is the interplay between these five areas and the macro level political and economical influences that portray an embodiment of West Indian cricket in one man. How the performances of Andre Russell are improved is not the purpose of this article however it does pose the question, how are they? Alternatively, the purpose is to discuss the idea of embodiment and how it can be used to summarise West Indian cricket; calypso cricket; and cricket with flare like no other in the world. A concluding thought to finish with is that when examined in more detail, Andre Russell as the embodiment of West Indian cricket, could also go beyond their boundaries and be more representative of cricket as collective. Is it more representative of the game internationally as it stands now? Has the political, economic and social influences on the game changed it? If the World Cup was anything to go by, I would argue that it was the catalyst to represent how the game has changed completely in recent times. Suggested ReadingAndrews, D. (2008) Kinesiology's Inconvenient Truth and the Physical Cultural Studies Imperative. Quest. Vol. 60, No. Unascertainable: 45-62.Picture ReferencesSengupta, A. (2013) Remembering CLR James, the master who wrote the classic, ‘Beyond a Boundary’. [Online] Available from: http://www.cricketcountry.com/articles/remembering-clr-james-the-master-who-wrote-the-classic-beyond-a-boundary-27255 [accessed 10 April 2015].Cricket Australia (2015) Whirlwind Russell blows Proteas away. [Online] Available from: http://www.cricket.com.au/news/match-report/match-report-south-africa-west-indies-fourth-odi-port-elizabeth-andre-russell/2015-01-26 [accessed 10 April 2015].

﻿﻿The best kind of coach is not predetermined. There is not an existing formula that can be used to develop coaching practice to such an extent that all that follow this formula become ‘great’ coaches or the ‘best’ kind of coaches. What I would hypothesise is that this formula starts with education: formal, non-formal or informal. What is real, and what is tangible, is that an individuals’ best coach (or teacher for that matter) has connected with them through a medium that is relevant to them both. What is salient to this social, complex and dynamic relationship - that can be predetermined by literature regarding the coach-athlete relationship – is unique to those individuals who share a relationship with that coach. We hear regularly about the ‘best’ or ‘great’ coaches through successes on elite levels, promoted through the media. Therein lies a problem. Certain sports receive more media coverage than others, for example football versus netball. However what needs to be recognised is that the impact of coaches from both sports is pertinent to those being coached and that should be highlighted. Furthermore, we could hear about the ‘best’ or ‘great’ coaches through the subjectivity of a significant individual, for example a journalist or a sports professional. I would argue that we can learn from those that we read about as there may be a message that is relevant to us and that’s the reason why it was shared by that significant individual in the first place. But it is the essence capturing content of that message that resonates with others. I have put an image in here of Edgar Davids and I wanted to discuss something about him that I greatly admire. Unfortunately, I can’t find the original article where I read this, but it was so striking the message is still extremely clear. In fact, it is so clear that I discuss its meaning with students in seminars. The article discussed that Davids had mentioned that one of the reasons underpinning his move to Barnet (there are others, of course, but I am focusing on this), is that he felt it was important that he learnt to coach before throwing himself into a coaching role in a higher division. This, albeit not coaching, is an excellent approach that builds a strong foundation for excellent coaching that should send a ubiquitous message to any sports coach. He isn’t using his playing status to move horizontally into coaching from playing as he recognises quite rightly, that being an excellent player does not make you an excellent coach. Other people will have opinions on this and I welcome them immediately, but, as I stated earlier, it’s a message that has been lost in the media and hasn’t reached who it should; other aspiring coaches. What Davids learns will be his until he is willing to share, but hopefully, it looks like this…My message to coaches would be to find that medium to connect with those individuals that you coach and use it to put the needs of those individuals first. As a coach, you have served your number one rule – to put the needs of the individuals you coach first and left your ego precisely where it belongs; nowhere near those who you coach. Subsequently, whether you become the ‘best’ coach, or a ‘great’ coach will be determined by those whose opinions matter; those who you coach. I believe that coaches should concentrate on trying to make a difference to the individuals they coach and to be the most effective coach they can be rather than trying to be this illusive and mysterious ‘best’ or ‘great’ coach.﻿﻿ Chester Chronicle, C. (2013) Blues stung by second-half Bees super show as opening game of the season ends in defeat. [Online] Available from: http://www.chesterchronicle.co.uk/sport/football/chester-fc-stung-second-half-bees-5696075 [accessed 10 April 2015].Chester Chronicle, C. (2013) Blues stung by second-half Bees super show as opening game of the season ends in defeat. [Online] Available from: http://www.chesterchronicle.co.uk/sport/football/chester-fc-stung-second-half-bees-5696075 [accessed 10 April 2015].Edgar Davids Picture ReferenceChester Chronicle, C. (2013) Blues stung by second-half Bees super show as opening game of the season ends in defeat. [Online] Available from: http://www.chesterchronicle.co.uk/sport/football/chester-fc-stung-second-half-bees-5696075 [accessed 10 April 2015].